↓ Skip to main content

When Did Carcharocles megalodon Become Extinct? A New Analysis of the Fossil Record

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
34 news outlets
blogs
13 blogs
twitter
134 tweeters
facebook
106 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
9 Google+ users
video
5 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
Title
When Did Carcharocles megalodon Become Extinct? A New Analysis of the Fossil Record
Published in
PLoS ONE, October 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0111086
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catalina Pimiento, Christopher F. Clements

Abstract

Carcharocles megalodon ("Megalodon") is the largest shark that ever lived. Based on its distribution, dental morphology, and associated fauna, it has been suggested that this species was a cosmopolitan apex predator that fed on marine mammals from the middle Miocene to the Pliocene (15.9-2.6 Ma). Prevailing theory suggests that the extinction of apex predators affects ecosystem dynamics. Accordingly, knowing the time of extinction of C. megalodon is a fundamental step towards understanding the effects of such an event in ancient communities. However, the time of extinction of this important species has never been quantitatively assessed. Here, we synthesize the most recent records of C. megalodon from the literature and scientific collections and infer the date of its extinction by making a novel use of the Optimal Linear Estimation (OLE) model. Our results suggest that C. megalodon went extinct around 2.6 Ma. Furthermore, when contrasting our results with known ecological and macroevolutionary trends in marine mammals, it became evident that the modern composition and function of modern gigantic filter-feeding whales was established after the extinction of C. megalodon. Consequently, the study of the time of extinction of C. megalodon provides the basis to improve our understanding of the responses of marine species to the removal of apex predators, presenting a deep-time perspective for the conservation of modern ecosystems.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 134 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 2 3%
United Kingdom 2 3%
Czechia 1 1%
Costa Rica 1 1%
France 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 69 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 23%
Researcher 15 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 18%
Student > Master 6 8%
Other 6 8%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 12 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 31%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 21 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 9%
Environmental Science 7 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 14 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 486. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 May 2019.
All research outputs
#18,876
of 14,092,939 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#413
of 147,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#265
of 232,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#14
of 3,056 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,092,939 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 147,559 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 232,797 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,056 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.